Differences and similarities in the long-latency auditory evoked potential recording of P1-N1 for different sound stimuli
Diferenças e similaridades no registro do potencial evocado auditivo P1-N1 para distintos estímulos sonoros
Pamela Papile Lunardelo; Humberto de Oliveira Simões; Sthella Zanchetta
Abstract
Purpose: this study aimed at illustrating the similarities and differences in the recording of components P1 and N1 for verbal and non-verbal stimuli, in an adult sample population, for reference purposes.
Methods: twenty-one adult, eutrophic individuals of both sexes were recruited for this study. The long-latency auditory evoked potential was detected by bilateral stimulation in both ears, using simultaneous recording, with non-verbal stimuli and the syllable /da/.
Results: for non-verbal and speech stimuli, N1 was identified in 100.0% of the participants, whereas P1 was observed in 85.7% and 95.2% individuals for non-verbal and speech stimuli, respectively. Significant differences were observed for the P1 and N1 amplitudes between the ears (p <0.05); the P1 component, in the left ear, was higher than that in the right ear, whereas the N1 component was higher in the right one. Regarding the stimuli, the amplitude and latency values of N1 were higher for speech, whereas in P1, different results were obtained only in latency.
Conclusion: the N1 component was the most frequently detected one. Differences in latency and amplitude for each stimuli occurred only for N1, which can be justified by its role in the process of speech discrimination.
Keywords
Resumo
Objetivo: caracterizar as similaridades e diferenças do registro das componentes P1 e N1 para os estímulos verbal e não verbal, em uma população adulta, para fins de referência.
Métodos: foram estudados 21 sujeitos adultos jovens, eutróficos, de ambos os sexos. O potencial evocado auditivo de longa latência foi pesquisado com estimulação bilateral e registro simultâneo das duas orelhas, com o estímulo clique e a sílaba /da/.
Resultados: a N1 foi identificada em 100,0% da população, para os estímulos clique e fala, enquanto que a P1 foi observada em 85,7% e 95,2% dos sujeitos, para os respectivos estímulos. Foram observadas diferenças significantes para a amplitude de P1 e N1 entre as orelhas (p <0.05), sendo na P1 os valores da esquerda superiores à direita e para N1 foi o inverso. Entre os estímulos os valores de amplitude e latência da N1 foram maiores para a fala, enquanto na P1, apenas a latência obteve resultados distintos.
Conclusão: a componente N1 foi a mais frequente. Apenas para N1 a diferença entre os tipos de estímulos ocorreram para latência e amplitude, o que pode ser justificado pelo seu papel no processo da discriminação de fala.
Palavras-chave
Referências
1. Sharma A, Martin K, Roland P, Bauer P, Sweeney MH, Gilley P et al. P1 latency as a biomarker for central auditory development in children with hearing impairment. J Am Acad Audiol. 2005;16(8):564-73.
2. Sharma A, Campbell J, Cardon G. Developmental and cross-modal plasticity in deafness: evidence from the P1 and N1 event related potentials in cochlear implanted children. Int J Psychophysiol. 2015;95(2)135-44.
3. Kral A, Eggermont JJ. What’s to lose and what’s to learn: development under auditory deprivation, cochlear implants and limits of cortical plasticity. Brain Res Rev. 2007;56(1):259-69.
4. Ponton CW, Eggermont JJ, Kwong B, Don M. Maturation of human central auditory system activity: evidence from multi-channel evoked potentials. Clinical Neurophysiol. 2000;111(2):220-36.
5. Eggermont JJ, Ponton CW. Auditory-evoked potential studies of cortical maturation in normal hearing and implanted children: correlations with changes in structure and speech perception. Acta Otolaryngol. 2003;123(2):249-52.
6. Jang JH, Jang HK, Kim SE, Oh SH, Chang SO, Lee JH. Analysis of P1 latency in normal hearing and profound sensorineural hearing loss. Clin Exp Otorhinolaryn. 2010;3(4):194-8.
7. Wunderlich JL, Cone-Wesson BK. Maturation of CAEP in infants and children: a review. Hear Res. 2006;212(1-2):212-23.
8. Silva LAF, Magliaro FCL, Carvalho ACM, Matas CG. Maturation of long latency auditory evoked potentials in hearing children: systematic review. CoDAS. 2017;29(3):e20160107.
9. Cunningham J, Nicol T, Zecker S, Kraus N. Speech-evoked neurophysiologic responses in children with learning problems: development and behavioral correlates of perception. Ear Hear. 2000;21(6):554-68.
10. Regaçone SF, Gução ACB, Giacheti CM, Romero ACL, Frizzo ACF. Long latency auditory evoked potentials in students with specific learning disorders. Audiol. Commun. Res. 2014;19(1):13-8.
11. Alvarenga KF, Vicente LC, Lopes RCF, Silva RA, Banhara MR, Lopes AC et al. The influence of speech stimuli contrast in cortical auditory evoked potentials. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol. 2013;79(3)336-41.
12. Groenen PAP, Beynon AJ, Snik AFM, Van BP. Speech-evoked cortical potentials and speech recognition in cochlear implant users. Scand Audiol. 2001;30(1):31-40.
13. Korczak PA, Kurtzberg D, Stapells DR. Effects of sensorineural hearing loss and personal hearing aids on cortical event-related potential and behavioral measures of speech-sound processing. Ear Hear. 2005;26(2):165-85.
14. Swink S, Stuart A. Auditory long latency responses to tonal and speech stimuli. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2012;55(2):447-59.
15. Oppitz SJ, Didoné DD, Silva MG, Folgeriani J. Long-latency auditory evoked potencials with verbal and nonverbal stimuli. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol. 2015;81(6):647-52.
16. Lister JJ, Bush ALH, Andel R, Matthews C, Morgan D, Edwards JD. Cortical auditory evoked responses of older adults with and without probable mild cognitive impairment. ClinNeurophysiol. 2016;127(2):1279-87.
17. Massa CGP, Rabelo CM, Matas CG, Schochat E, Sameli AG. P300 com estímulo verbal e não verbal em adultos normo-ouvintes. Braz. J. Otorhinolaryngol. 2011;77(6):686-90.
18. American Academy of Audiology (AAA). Clinical Practice Guidelines: diagnosis, treatment and management of children and adults with central auditory processing disorder. In: 2010: https://audiologyweb.s3.amazonaws.com/migrated/CAPD%20Guidelines%208- 2010.pdf_539952af956c79.73897613.pdf
19. Koravand A, Juntras B, Lassonde M. Abnormalities in cortical auditory responses in children with central auditory processing disorder. Neuroscience. 2017;346:135-48.
20. Kummer P, Burger M, Schuster M, Rosanowski F, Eysholdt U, Hoppe U. Cortical auditory evoked potentials to acoustic changes in speech stimuli in children. Folia PhoniatrLogop. 2007;59(5):273-80.
21. Pereira LD, Schochat E. Testes auditivos comportamentais para avaliação do processamento auditivo central. São Paulo: Pró-Fono; 2011.
22. Musiek FE. Frequency (pitch) and duration pattern tests. J Am Acad Audiol. 1994;5(4):265-8.
23. Schochat E, Rabelo CM, Sanfins MD. Processamento auditivo central: testes tonais de padrão de frequência e de duração em indivíduos normais de 7 a 16 anos de idade. Pró-Fono R Atual. Cientif. 2000;12(2):1-7.
24. Steinschneider M, Liegeois-hauvel C, Brugge JF. Auditory evoked potentials and their utility in the assessment of complex sound processing. In: Winer JA, Schreiner CE (eds). The Auditory Cortex. New York: Springer; 2011. p. 535-59.
25. Didoné DD, Oppitz SJ, Folgearini J, Biaggio EPV, Garcia MV. Auditory evoked potentials with different speech stimuli: a comparison and standardization of values. Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2016;20(2):99-104.
26. Cone B, Whitaker R. Dynamics of infant cortical Auditory Evoked Potentials (CAEPs) for tone and speech tokens. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2013;77(7):1162-73.
27. Fitzroy AB, Krizman J, Tierney A, Agouridou M, Kraus N. Longitudinal maturation of auditory cortical function during adolescence. Front Hum Neurosci. 2015;9(530):eCollection.
28. Koravand A, Juntras B, Lassonde M. Abnormalities in cortical auditory responses in children with central auditory processing disorder. Neuroscience. 2017;346:135-8.
29. Oppitz SJ, Bruno RS, Didoné DD, Garcia MV. Temporal resolution and cortical potential in different levels of english proficiency. Rev. CEFAC. 2017;19(1):27-40.
30. Moller A. Anatomy of the auditory nervous system. In: Moller A (org). Hearing: anatomy, physiology, and disorders of the auditory system. 3th ed. San Diego: Plural Publishing; 2013. p.91-114.
31. Matas CG, Silva FBL, Carrico B, Leite RA, Magliaro FCL. Long-latency auditory evoked potentials in sound field in normal-hearing children. Audiol. Commun. Res. 2015;20(4):305-12.
32. Silva LAF, Magliaro FCL, Carvalho ACM, Matas CG. Cortical maturation of long latency auditory evoked potentials in hearing children: the complex P1-N1-P2-N2. CoDAS. 2017;29(4):e20160216.
33. Ostroff JM, Martin BA, Boothroyd A. Cortical evoked response to acoustic change within a syllable. Ear Hear. 1998;19(4):290-7.
Submetido em:
24/01/2019
Aceito em:
24/06/2019
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Mendeley
Email